Religion & Spirituality >
Christianity (Other)
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedAre homosexual acts natural or sinful?
Results so far:
| Natural | 45% | 672 votes | Total: 1483 votes | |
| Sinful | 55% | 811 votes |
Natural
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesAre homosexual acts natural or sinful?
Some claim homosexuality is unnatural and therefore wrong. Floods, cancer, earthquakes are all natural but we perceive them as bad things. A lot of things that are unnatural such as medicines etc we see as good.
It is now widely agreed that homosexuality is natural. Cases of homosexuality have been found in various animal species throughout the world, which suggest this could be true. Many believe that the sexual act involved in homosexuality is the sin. It is not a surprise that most of the people that uphold this view are often very religious. They take their lead from holy texts such as the Bible.
The teaching of these religions claim sex is seen as a union between man and wife for the purpose of procreation and nothing more. Therefore masturbation, sex before marriage and homosexual sex are deemed as wrong and even sinful.
This therefore suggests that the only purpose for sex is to procreate. This to me sounds ridiculously animalistic. What about the love that is shared between two people? Sex can be a joining of two people that want to show how much they mean to one another. It is emotional and deeply poignant for people. Sex is pleasurable and is a vital part of a relationship between humans. It is not just the sexual act itself, there is meaning, rationalization and emotions that are all incorporated in to it. What could be more natural for humans?
People often say that to have sex for pleasure makes you no better than the animals. They believe you are giving in to your basic animal urges.
Most animals do not have sex for pleasure! For them it literally is a matter of procreation. So surely someone got their wires crossed a long the line? If humans only have sex to ensure our species procreate like the animals do, surely that makes us no better than the animals?
Human sex is made up of many aspects, whether it be homosexual and heterosexual it is natural. To claim that sex is unnatural because the outcome is not to have children is choosing to ignore part of what makes us human. Our rationality and emotionality, which sets us apart from the animals.
Homosexuality is opposed in most of the world's major religions and seen as sinful by Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam. Religion has a lot to answer for, both good and bad things. Throughout history up until today, bad things have been done in the name of religion and God. Many of which would be agreed is immoral and sometimes even evil.
The religions above, are based on historical teachings, of the word of prophets/ God. All of which were written and recorded by man. Some may believe that the controlling and guiding force behind the man writing, was God. But it is still man who has written them. Man, who has all the weaknesses and faults that he has always had.
Where are the gospels of women? What role did the women play? The answer is not much of a role. Women throughout history, even today in some cultures have very little rights. I am not here to discuss feminism. I do however question why was Jesus not born as a woman? Why not the daughter of God? The main reason I believe, is that no body would have listened.
It was a mans world back then, and only a man could do the things Jesus had to do. If he had been born a woman, she would have probably been stoned to death. The same goes for why the Old Testament is written from a male perspective. To put it quite simply there was not a female perspective back then.
The bible does have some statements against homosexuality, ""natural" intercourse- that between a man and a woman" (Rom. 1:26-27). What if that belief was just St Paul's personal belief? That would not mean that it was the word of God, but instead it would be the opinion of a man.
What if one or more of the other gospels that were disregarded by the Church when they were choosing the gospels for the Bible, said that intercourse between all humans is natural. Man and man, woman and woman, as we are made in the image of God and the mutual love of consenting adults is of the same worth. It is possible as thousands upon thousands of gospels were destroyed Would that have altered the way we live today?
At the other end of the spectrum, if we lived in a post apocalyptic world, and an anti-gay leaflet was found. Would that then become one of the foundations of that world?
Jesus taught about love and acceptance. He spoke with prostitutes, criminals, the sick and even murders. He protected the outcasts of society, "let he who has not sinned cast the first stone." He said the most important of all the commandments was; "Love they neighbour."
There were so many more accounts of the life of Jesus, so much more information about Jesus in the thousands of other gospels that are now destroyed by the decision and hands of men. How will we ever really know what Jesus thought about homosexuality?
Christians often use the example of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 as proof that homosexuality is wrong. If you actually read Genesis 19 it is quite a disturbing account in more than one way.
Two angels were sent to Sodom. They we befriended by a man named Lot. Lot begged the two angels to stay with him for the night, for their own protection. Eventually after some persuading the angels took Lot up on his offer. They had a feast and baked unleavened bread. Before Lot, his family and the two angels could sleep, the men of Sodom, described as young and old surrounded his house, demanding to see the two visitors. Lot goes outside to speak to the crowd. Lot then offers his two virgin daughters to the crowd, to "do ye to them as is good in your eyes." The crowd did not accept Lots offer and continued to ask for the visitors. The angels pulled Lot back into the house and blinded all the men outside. The angels then told Lot to prepare his wife and two daughters to leave the city, before they destroyed it in God's name. Lot left with his wife and two daughters and they were warned to not look back. Once they had left the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire. Lot's wife turned behind her to look and was turned into a pillar of salt. Lot and his two daughters dwelt in the mountain and lived in a cave. Both daughters made Lot drink wine on two separate nights, then when he fell asleep and was unaware, the firstborn slept with him, the next night the second daughter did the same. Lot was not aware during the act or after it. Both daughters conceived and gave birth to their fathers child.
I do not believe that it is just my self that sees a few problems with the above passage. It seems to contradict the messages it intends to give. If all the men in Sodom were homosexuals, then there would not be a Sodom with people. Secondly, if the men practised both homosexual and heterosexual sex, they would probably be interested in Lot's two virgin daughters. Why would Lot offer homosexual men females if he knew them to be homosexuals?
Why would Lot put two visitors lives before his own daughters? Should we take it literally that Lot's wife turned to pillar of salt? I find it somewhat peculiar that homosexuality is deemed wrong, yet incest is perfectly acceptable. Many people believe that the bible, the Old Testament especially should not be taken in a literal sense. That analogies and stories were used during that time to explain things people did not understand and get the intended messages across. Jesus for instance often used analogies and short stories when he was preaching to the masses of people.
If homosexuality was deemed so evil and sinful, why is it not one of the Ten Commandments? These commandments are present in, Jewish, Anglican, Orthodox and Catholic denominations. Although the ten vary slightly in order and wording the basic understandings are same. As these commandments are present in all of the above religions/ denominations, then it is a reasonable assumption to believe that these are the universal commandments by which people should live.
For Christian and Catholic denominations, the most important commandment as given by Jesus was, "Love thy neighbour, as you would be loved", so using the same assumption as above, I believe this to is meant as a universally applicable Commandment, some would believe is the most important of all the commandments.
Homosexuality is not present in any of the universally applicable commandments. It is only mentioned a few brief times in the Bible. Anyone can read the Bible and find something to support their claim if they try hard enough and use it for bad things.
In conclusion, there is little in the Bible that suggests homosexuality is wrong and even sinful. The bits that are there are deeply flawed whether you take them literally or try and derive your own meaning from them. The books are flawed, as they were written by men who have prejudices just like everyone else a long time ago. Surely the most important message to take is what Jesus thought was the main commandment.
To love one another.
To claim homosexuality is unnatural does not have much strength as discussed in the beginning. To claim the sexual act itself is a sin, is founded on premises that make us similar to animals.
It's time people just learned to accept homosexuality for what it is. Another part of human nature and life.
Learn more about this author, Amy Dunne.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Sinful
Are homosexual acts natural or sinful? According to the scriptures, not only are they they are sinful, but unnatural, as well.
First to the terms "homosexual acts" and "natural."
"Homosexual acts" refers to activity of a sexual nature that is engaged in by members of the same gender- said desires that a man or woman may be born with, or indulge in, with the passage of time, either of their own accord or by force.
By calling these acts "natural," one is implying that this is not a sin because it is natural, i.e., a force of nature or an instinct- and that since it is in one's DNA, so to speak, it is so much a part of the person as to be part and parcel of their personality- in other words, their identity.
Furthermore, these are actions they choose to engage in- but if they can't control the thoughts and actions that do follow, it is because "God made me this way, so it must be okay. It's not my fault that I'm sinning."
Since the logic behind these arguments is shaky at best, the stated "reasons" for someone's behavior (and its consequences), are merely rationalizations designed to dull the conscience and give license for further sinful and self-destructive behavior.
But even in the absence of logic, the Scriptures speak plainly about what is and is not acceptable sexual behavior.
In Old Testament times the penalty for homosexuality was death: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death..." (Lev. 20:13). (Note that it is not a woman they are talking about executing here.)
In the New Testament, Paul states, in a scathing letter to the church at Corinth, Greece: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind" (1 Cor. 6: 9-11).
In a letter to the church in Rome, Paul delivers an even darker-toned message:"And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly..." (Romans 1:27).
Of course, there are those who will wrench words around in their minds until the pretzelized meaning justifies their behavior. Such people will say that the scriptures don't really come out and pinpoint homosexuality as being sinful.
"Besides," they continue, "That was the old law, and Jesus said the old law was done away when He came. And don't forget- He said we are supposed to love one another- so don't judge me..."
That the Savior did away with the Mosaic Law is true, but during the Sermon On The Mount, Christ spoke of the Commandments in this way: "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" (Matt. 6: 27-28).
In other words, the times did change, but now it appeared that the Lord expected His saints to be more proactive about obedience, living an even higher law than before- not stricter so much as more refined and Christ-like.
To return to the word "natural" again, pro-gay lobbyists and their defenders say that times have changed- that people are more open-minded now about sexual behavior and choices, going so far as to posit that what one does or says or believes has no effect on others.
But we don't live in a vacuum. Everything we do has some sort of effect on our surroundings and our fellow citizens.
It is interesting to note that while other vices such as alcoholism, drug use, gambling and even prostitution have been given a "free pass," so to speak, by society, homosexuality is still resisted and looked down upon by the majority of people and the nations in which they reside. This would seem to indicate that there is something abnormal about behavior that goes against the propagation of the species. You might even call it "unnatural."
Suppose that society does a "Sodom and Gomorrah," accepting not only same-sex relations but also adultery and every other base and sinful behavior under the sun? In the words of Spencer W. Kimball, former president of the LDS Church: "Social acceptance does not change the status of an act, making wrong into right... The practice (of homosexuality) would still be deep, dark sin."
After all of this, one thing remains to be said.
In any idealogical battlefield the rule is that the longer the conflict drags out, the more likely opposing sides will do injustice to their respective causes. In the case of gay and lesbian activists, it is the double-standard they increasingly engage in every time they speak of tolerance- then in the same breath start lobbing words like "hater" and "homophobe" and "Nazi" at anyone who doesn't agree with their choice of bedmates.
On the other side are the Christians. And what is it they need to stop doing? Confusing the sinner with the behavior. Christ said to condemn the sin, not the person involved in it- and that if a disciple began throwing stones instead of trying to relieve the sinner's burden, that same Christian would stand condemned at the last day, if they did not repent.
The duty of all Christ's followers is to live their lives in such a way that they are guided by the Holy Spirit past the rocky shoals of prejudice. Then and only then can they see the difference beteween someone who is a slave to their desires and those who want to break the chains, but don't know how. Then and only then will they see all people as literal sons and daughters of a loving, caring Heavenly Father.
I personally know of churches that have an open-door policy toward all who enter their doors, whether they are struggling with alcoholism, drug addiction, abuse or same-sex attraction. These people come to church- not the State or the mainstream media- for answers. And it is only the true Saints inside those buildings that can provide the healing God is ready to give.
We're not talking about compromise here. It's more a matter of civility founded on charity- the pure love of Christ.
Learn more about this author, Dan Hiland.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
